Navigation

021-New Testament, same as, but better than Islamic Traditions

Jay Smith

Published on Dec 7, 2006 by Pfander Films

It doesn’t help to compare the Bible with the Qur’an, because we don’t make the same claims for both. A better comparison would be that between the New Testament (that area of the Bible we as Christians use as our model for life) with the Islamic Traditions (the material you Muslims use for your model), because there you will find the parallels. Thus, while you use the Sira of Muhammad (to understand the story about his life), we likewise use the Sira of Jesus, to understand his life, found in the black lettering of the gospel accounts. While you use the Hadith of Muhammad (the sayings of Muhammad), we use the Hadith of Jesus, that which Jesus said, found in the red lettering of the gospel accounts. To understand and expound on the Qur’an, you go to the Tafsir of Tabari, Baidawi, Zamakshari and Suyuti; likewise we have the Tafsir of Jesus’ words in Paul’s letters, expounding and explaining what Jesus said and did. The history of mankind is found in the Tahrikh, which we have paralleled in the book of Acts. The parallel for the Qur’an, as God’s uncreated word (Sura 85:22) is then Jesus himself, since we see him also as God’s uncreated and eternal word. The problem, however, lies in the authority of your traditions. While your Islamic traditions were not written by any witnesses, and 200 — 300 years after the facts, ours were written mostly by witnesses, between 20 — 30 years after the events they detail. Consequently, this suggests that our New Testament is similar but much more historically authoritative than your Muslim Traditions; proving that if you truly want to know who Jesus is, why not come back to those who knew him intimately and wrote about him truly…the disciples and apostles who compiled the New Testament.